Friday, November 6, 2020

Chris Mellon and those videos

 Alejandro Rojas

On 23 October 2020, Alejandro Rojas published an article written by himself, titled "How US Intelligence Community Insiders Got the Senate's Attention Regarding UFOs." Regarding the source of two USN UAP videos given to the New York Times for its November 2017 article, Christopher Mellon is cited as stating:

"I received the videos. the now-famous videos in the Pentagon parking lot, from a Defense Department official. I still have the packaging." 

Now, that last bit of the statement is interesting, namely, that Christopher Mellon says "I still have the packaging." This is because on 7 August 2018 Twitter user @Jay09784691 posted several tweets about the existence of a number of images, which had been found on a US website belonging to Christopher Mellon. One of these was the image below:


 

If this is the packaging referred to by Mellon, then can we glean anything further from the image? "Chris Mellon 16000 9/7/17" This is possibly the date and time when Mellon received the package, as this would be useful for creating a chain of custody of the material in the package. 

Another image from Mellon's website, is the following:


This image appears to be a set of four CD-R's lying on a package. Many in the UAP community have assumed these CD-R's contained copies of the videos. Note that the CD-R's contain "Unclassified" material. The USN said at one stage that the videos were unclassified. There is also the number "9/5" which is probably 5th September, two days before the date on the Mellon package. 

Who is R. Essex?

At about 22m20s In a YouTube video discussion dated September 2019, between Canadian researcher Grant Cameron, and U.S. researcher Richard Dolan, there was mention made of the manner in which the initial two United States Navy Unidentified Aerial Phenomena videos had been "released?" Cameron states that he had seen the images of the material from Mellon's website. He had noted the name on the package which was not Elizondo's or Mellon's.  Cameron went on to say that he had checked out this individual via a contact he had in the Pentagon. It turned out that there was such an individual at the Pentagon; it was a female, in Public Relations. 

Despite a check via FaceBook; LinkedIn and Radaris, etc., I have been unable to locate such an individual. Has any blog reader any additional information?

22 comments:

  1. R. Essex is not a person, it's a comic book's character.
    Rebecca Essex, married with Nathaniel Essex, a bio-engenieer. "... it was however when she discovered that Essex had used humans as living test-subjects that Rebecca started to resent Essex. This resentment turned into hate after she discovered that Essex had also used their own dead son as a test-subject, trying to figure out what had caused his death. Essex however had a change of heart due to his encounter with the ancient evil...". It's a metaphor for a group of insdiders not accepting the secrecy anymore. Not letting the phenomenon continue with this grand experiment called earth.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hi anonymous, thanks for this "out of the box" thinking.

      Delete
  2. Just another thought, I don't think those are DVDs, I'm pretty sure they're CDs as it states CD-R on them. Check the bottom right disc in the lower portion of the inner ring.

    A CD-R has usually has between 650-700MB, the videos had the following sizes:


    flir1_981.mp4”: size 3.85MB
    “gimble_vid…_492.mp4”: size 6.93MB
    “gofast…_737.mp4”: size 9.15MB

    So about 20MB in total. Those three videos would fit on a *single* CD ~35 times.

    So I figure TTSA/Chris Mellon must have a lot of supporting documentation for those videos.

    Even if we assume the person burning the discs wasn't technically minded and burned one video per disc, it still doesn't match up since there are four videos (not three).

    So Mellon must have received additional information and not simply three videos.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hi Jay, nice observation. They are indeed labelled CD-R. I have updated my blog post to reflect this.

      Delete
  3. The videos were not "leaked", no one filters + 4KHD videos in 240 pixel format, they were intentionally delivered to fabricate this whole story that SOME are making good money at the expense of honest people who believe in the phenomenon.
    Why do they keep playing the game with Elizondo and his group of liars? Why do they have some "scientists" among them?
    Why ask if someone has more information? It is the same as if you asked if anyone knows more about Donald Duck or The Teletubis.

    ReplyDelete
  4. With your permission I am going to do a little analysis, an analysis that until now no one seems to have done.
    1- A "scientific analysis" is based on evidence, redundant verifications and certainties, sometimes testimonies help, but people's opinion and their speech is always contaminated by something, even when it is of good will.
    2- Everyone took for granted that the story of the videos is true, who would doubt the respected gentlemen and the government of the United States?.
    3- The 3 published videos do not have more than 240 Pixels, but the videos captured by FLIR systems do so at + 4KHD definition of digital output.
    4- It was always said that the videos were "leaked" in September 2017, and 25 months later in September 2019 the government "admitted" that those videos belonged to them, and 32 months later the government itself "declassified" them by publishing them.
    5- TTSA published the first 2 videos on December 16, 2017: "FLIR1" (2 minutes 45 seconds, and 6.13 Mb) and "Gimbal" (1 minute 53 seconds, and 4.25 Mb), and on March 9, 2018 in third video: "Go Fast" (2 minutes 4 seconds, and 5.03 Mb), this including titles, credits and explanations that (surely) did not come with the original government videos, the 3 videos add up to a total of 6 Minutes 42 Seconds and 15.41 Mb.
    6- Let's continue, the photo of the 4 videos is remarkable: it says "THIS MEDIUM IS UNCLASSIFIED USGOVERNMENT PROPERTY", there are 4 (four) DVDs that by practical definition could contain (together, at least) 18.8 Gb (each DVD can contain 4.7 Gb).
    7- TTSA in its YouTube profile indicates on the date of publication of the videos: "Official USG Footage of UAP for Public Release".
    So:
    First:
    If the videos come on DVD from the United States government with the phrase "THIS MEDIUM IS UNCLASSIFIED USGOVERNMENT PROPERTY", and this was known to the TTSA when it published "Official USG Footage of UAP for Public Release".
    Why would anyone bother to "confirm" and "declassify" the 3 videos many months (years) later? It was a fact that from the beginning they were "unclassified".
    Or are the DVDs fake, and that's why they were deleted from their original web page?.
    Or is it that the government of the United States is so easy to circumvent and that someone or anyone can take military videos and leak them publicly?.
    And if the videos were "leaked", why then did the government not initiate an investigation and arrest those responsible as soon as they were published, as happened in other cases where secret information was "leaked"?.
    If the videos were "leaked" then why are they on government "unclassified" DVDs?.
    Who is lying here, the government, TTSA, Elizondo, Mellon, or all of them?.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. A lot of info floats around the halls, rooms, servers of the Pentagon. Sometimes information gets overlooked and never "assigned" a classification. He (Mellon) said they used a loophole, and I am guessing this is it. The info was probably meant to be classified as secret or above, but no one ever marked it officially. So technically, it was unclassified. Once it was out, there was no longer any use in classifying it, and viola! You have what some may have called leaked info in the beginning, but was deemed unclassified after its release, because there just is no use in classifying something everyone has already seen.

      Delete
    2. Hi Juan, Nice analysis with many good points.

      Delete
  5. Second:
    Why do you need 4 DVDs with capacity to back up 18.8 Gb (4.7 Gb each), if the videos (in total) are less than 15.41 Mb?.
    In the 4 DVDs, the 3 complete videos could enter 1220 times, including the additions made by the TTSA, in each DVD those 3 videos could enter 305 times.
    So I repeat, are the DVDs a fake ?, or worse, do those 4 DVDs contain the 3 original videos in + 4KHD, but the TTSA, Elizondo Mellon & Cia. Decided to publish them only in 240 Pixel format ?, WHY?!.
    Third:
    Why are you going to use the name of a comic in a postal shipment where you include 4 DVDs labeled with the identification of the United States government and "unclassified", and you are also going to publish its content weeks later? It's stupid even for a movie with a fourth category argument.
    And the most important, if they did not find "L. Elizondo" in his destination, were they going to return the shipment to the comic "R. Essex"?.
    What kind of reckless person sends sensitive material in the postal mail?.
    The videos, their mystery, the postage and the publication and then deletion of the information from the web, with small inconsistent details and apparently put together by a 6-year-old boy in how things unfolded around those videos, gives to think and is presented as an artificial fabrication of a story that has other details as bizarre as these.
    Apparently someone was trying to put together a puzzle, hammering it, and served it in a soup plate with salad to the media ... and everyone ate it with pleasure without questioning the principles of rationality and scientific thinking.
    This seems designed by an incompetent spy and intended for delusional ufologists who lure people with lies and deceptions to make money and gain public fame.

    ReplyDelete
  6. DVD (4.7 Gb) or CD-R (700 Mb) for the case is the same, the videos are less than 15.41 Mb, just do the math.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Hi Keith,

    I have looked up the U.S. Federal Government Employee list and there is no female with the name R. Essex employed in 2017.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Reply to Anonymous 1 /
    Thanks Anonymous, you give me space to extend and explain my comment.
    In another post on this same website, a reader named John Doe made an interesting comment about the videos, dated September 5, 2020 at 11:41 AM, here:
    https://ufos-scientificresearch.blogspot.com/2020/09/the-seventh-observable.html
    There is also other information on the subject on this website, but I stay there.
    To find out:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classified_information_in_the_United_States
    And there:
    https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Executive_Order_13526
    And especially:
    "PART 4 — SAFEGUARDING" and "Sec. 4.1. General Restrictions on Access".
    Section "(a)" complete.
    Section "(c) An official or employee leaving agency service may not remove classified information from the agency's control or direct that information be declassified in order to remove it from agency control".
    And please read:
    Section "(d) Classified information may not be removed from official premises without proper authorization".
    And there:
    "(a) Nothing in this order shall supersede any requirement made by or under the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, or the National Security Act of 1947, ..."
    Now, the last one, "National Security Act of 1947", includes a section:
    "Subchapter 5. Protection of Operational Files".
    Your institutional terms here:
    https://www.cia.gov/library/readingroom/docs/1947-07-26.pdf
    The full text here:
    https://www.dni.gov/index.php/ic-legal-reference-book/national-security-act-of-1947
    I am a pilot, as such I must study laws, especially those that refer to operations outside the national territory of the countries (any of them) where I must fly.
    Fear not, I will not cite any more laws, but in the United States you must ask permission to film or photograph military installations, if you do not do so you can go to prison, this being how much more are the records and files captured by the armed forces themselves, including the Navy.
    It is not like you say that the files are there and someone must classify them or not, the military files captured by combat jets, air surveillance systems, aircraft carriers and the United States naval defense system ARE reserved for the Force since they are born , AFTER being reviewed then they are given the classified destination or not.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Reply to Anonymous 2 /
    On the other hand, after the WTC attacks, nothing escapes the eyes of the big brother in the corridors of the Pentagon, for something it is the third building in the world with more security cameras, filters on its servers and recognition controls of all class.
    It is not that you can wander through its rooms, find 4 CD-Rs with videos and take them home without someone noticing.
    That doesn't work that way, but please ask Edward Snowden, who spent a decade on the run from government for leaking emails and reports.
    Now, in the end, my questions had to do with the origin of the videos and the HOW they ended up published, there is something very strange there and neither the government, nor the Navy, nor the TTSA, nor Elizondo, nor Mellon, have given an explanation satisfactory.
    The TTSA reads this, that's for sure, it NEVER explained because the videos are 240 Pixels when the system records in much higher definition, there is a booby-hunting trap and they say nothing about it.
    As soon as they saw the Sun, the videos were analyzed by the adaptive and cognitive artificial intelligence module of the private JWRED network, and by the public data verification system of anomalies and events of the Q & SIT laboratories.
    The same analysis was done when the Navy released the videos.
    And what do you think? the videos ARE THE SAME, exactly the same, same definition, same frequency, same digital composition and even same algorithmic processor.
    It would have been, for this booby-hunting trap, a wise move for the Navy to post the ORIGINAL videos and not the ones it gave to TTSA to create this whole fantastic story of UAPs and national security.
    Many of us are asking here for a public honesty from the actors, but that does not come, and that is disappointing.
    As the TTSA, Elizondo and Mellon gain public notoriety and money on the matter, the Navy and the government are keeping their mouths hoping that inquisitive and rational people will forget about the inconsistencies of the narrative.
    But that won't happen, the topic is too big to ignore these rookie mistakes.
    The final responsible holder of JWRED and Q & SIT laboratories (JW Sofia, IMEC-2017 / CCA-S113-GCS and free copyright references 2017-Hgf / 17 and Hgf / 18-19) said many months ago: "This is not a conspiracy nor something like this, this is a buggy, poorly organized and poorly executed intelligence operation, people are not stupid and can pick up on small and big mistakes, the issue is real, it is true, but it is not there for some do business and fill your pockets and your ego at the expense of the public's expectations, it is there to be investigated seriously and responsibly, we do not want global security directors, or musicians, governments and scientists complicit in the manipulation of information, we want The truth, but if the form is this of deception and opportunism, we will continue working alone, we have the resources to do so, we would like to participate in the search with others, but not in this way where the public receives half-truths, that which end up being complete lies" and "Judge for yourself, think and do not remain silent, mysteries are not discovered alone and not by the hand of liars".

    ReplyDelete
  10. Some considerations.
    1) GO TO THE SOURCE, it is necessary to eliminate the distortions in the information of the history the videos, since they came from the US Navy, including the TTSA, no one contributed all the data together in a single text or speech.
    1.a) This is the original US Navy statement (And Juan Carlos above is right), the videos were "unclassified", but they were made public without authorization (that is: they were reserved for the US Navy).
    But there is something else that nobody says, is that the 2004 video (FLIR) was published in 2007 as explained by the US Navy and the rest in 2017 (GIMBAL and GOFAST).
    https://www.defense.gov/Newsroom/Releases/Release/Article/2165713/statement-by-the-department-of-defense-on-the-release-of-historical-navy-videos/
    1.b) The videos published by the US Navy can be downloaded from the following original link.
    An interesting fact about them (and Juan Carlos is right, again), the videos are the same that the TTSA published, without differences, they are exactly the same as if the TTSA had given the videos to the US Navy so that the government post them, weird.
    Those videos ARE NOT the originals, by no means, they were cut and processed before posting.
    An interesting fact about the videos is the output format, which was improved by giving the videos a larger size.
    https://www.navair.navy.mil/foia/documents
    2) INFORM YOURSELF WITH SOURCES, and here the best source is the US Navy through its government agencies.
    The best source for videos, by far today, is the US Naval Institute, founded 147 years ago:
    https://blog.usni.org/about-usni
    The USNI published in January 2020 an extensive note on the videos, which has details that until now have not been treated properly in public, due to their importance and significance.
    One such detail is the sighting of a cross-shaped object the size of a Boeing 737 plane (90x90x30 feet) just under the water against which the waves were breaking.
    https://blog.usni.org/posts/2020/01/10/the-navy-and-the-uaps
    3) IF YOU SEE AN AIRCRAFT CARRIER IN FRONT OF YOUR DOOR, ARE YOU GOING TO FOCUS ON THE AIRCRAFT THAT IT CARRIES? Obviously not.
    The presence of that object in the ocean is considered of GREATER importance than the UAPs themselves.
    Will the secret reports from the global marine sensor network say anything about this?
    A little known fact is that the global network of LINE stations, in conjunction with the polar orbit satellites operated by Q & SIT laboratories (Quantum Laboratories & South Integrated Technologies Laboratories), have frequently reported the presence of these submersibles underwater.
    Unfortunately the reports in territorial waters are confidential for the countries of those jurisdictions, but the verifications in free waters are impressive.
    4) THE REALITY is that nobody wants to alarm the silent, still and comfortable inhabitants of the planet, but the 3 videos were recorded in the ocean.
    Look, if you are taking a bath on a beach you may be surprised by a shark, you are close to the coast and you will never know what is moving in the rest of the ocean that covers 70% of the earth's surface ... if not You go out to look for it ... or if you see it but you are busy following a small light in the sky that moves quickly.
    I do not want to detract from the UAPs, never again! But it is time that we ask ourselves where they come from and if it is possible for "someone" to transport them from here to there under the water.
    Because the ocean is the most vulnerable frontier that humans have.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Frank Gradiner PhD, Tusla USANovember 11, 2020 at 8:54 AM

      I know the activity of the Q & SIT laboratories, many years ago I worked for them as a supplier of special chemicals and magisterial formulas, but it is the first time that I read that they operate polar orbit satellites, and I think it is the FIRST TIME that someone mentions on the internet that a private scientific organization uses satellites to track UAPs and USPs, every day something new is learned, but !!! What else are we missing ?! Let's dream of the first contact from responsible, honest, humble and meticulous scientists !!!

      Delete
  11. S. Anderson & G. FenderNovember 11, 2020 at 2:06 AM

    We believe that underwater sightings of large devices in the ocean are extremely important in relation to the understanding of UAP phenomena, also in relation to defense and foreign security issues of countries, large territories often with low population density are surrounded by the ocean, Australia is a case study, anything that moves in the surrounding oceans is an intrigue and a safety risk, if the crew of these large devices do not show up, their intentions must be considered doubtful.

    ReplyDelete
  12. All this is "slightly" disturbing, on the one hand an ideological construction that invites "trust" by the names of those who compose it, but on the other, strong inconsistencies that even those who are more "convinced" destabilize.
    Low definition videos and fast objects and lights that no plane can reach, and nothing of investigating a massive underwater ship.
    Does anyone play with our imagination?
    People do not trust people, we cannot expect governments to do so, we cannot expect companies to trust governments, much less NGOs to trust companies.
    I found ufologists speaking ill of the NGOs, and StarUps speaking ill of the government.
    How can I hope to find a truth, little one, there?
    They tell us that there is a radar shield that can identify a 6x6-inch object flying 100 km above the Earth, and they give it the pompous title of "space fence: watching over us", but after half a century no one could access the Photographs of the UAPs that flew over Washington DC.
    While the world watches silently 3 videos showing thermal glare, nothing else, nobody explains how they got the digital package out of a military plane, who edited the images and where the originals are.
    I think of the checks that come and go from film and TV production companies, and I feel sad.
    Is this the only thing there is?
    Is this the only thing that specialists in military intelligence, counterespionage, scientists and renowned professionals linked to the government and the armed forces have to give us?
    And it scares me, because if that's the case, and the UAP crew are evil, then all of us are more than complicated.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Ufology is in many ways for exosciences, what astrology was for astronomy in the eighteenth century, it is a principle from the social, the interest of people that drives research.
    But they are not all roses, there are many thorns there too, in Latin America for example, especially in Argentina, ufologists base their work on opportunism, lies and insults to all those who do not think like them.
    Not all of them are like this, but top publishers mistreated government officials, organizations, and entire geographic regions, while using their cases to make money.
    It is not strange so much reserve and so much confidentiality, partial news and missing data, no one serious and responsible wants to be exposed by the lying ufologists in the media and on the internet.
    And the discrediting operations of these ufologists against all those who oppose their work are not strange, they usually "whisper in the ear" of those who publish about UFOs and research, how "bad the others are".
    At the same time these ufologists do their business with the work of others, with the history of others, with the experiences of others, they talk about places they never visited and cases they never investigated.
    I would like more release of government information, but I understand why it does not happen, there are many vultures hovering over it and flying over the true researchers and communicators of the phenomenon.
    Thanks.
    Ema.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Comments about this post have now closed.

    ReplyDelete

Paper on UAP published by the Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies at the Bar-Ilan University in Israel

  Introduction Franc Milburn is a geostrategic and national security analyst, with a specialization in UAP. One of his aims is to inject dis...